User talk:Beerslayer
Welcome to Memory Alpha, Beerslayer! I've noticed that you've already made some contributions to our database – thanks for your edit to the Saul Rubinek page! We all hope that you'll enjoy our activities here and decide to join our community. If you'd like to learn more about working with the nuts and bolts of Memory Alpha, I have a few links that you might want to check out: * Our policies and guidelines provides links to inform you on what is appropriate for Memory Alpha and what is not. Particular items of note are the and policies, the editing guidelines, our point of view, copyrights and guidelines for proper etiquette. * includes a basic tutorial about how to use our special wikitext code here on Memory Alpha. * Naming conventions provides guidelines on how to name a new page that you may want to create. * The Manual of Style is an overview of the basic guidelines for how to format and style your articles. * is a list of suggestions that can help you put together an article that might end up on our Featured Articles list someday. * See the user projects page for current projects of our archivists, or help us to reduce the number of stubs. * Look up past changes you have made in your log. * Keep track of your favorite Memory Alpha articles through your very own . * Create your own user page and be contacted on this page, your . One other suggestion: if you're going to make comments on talk pages or make other sorts of comments, please be sure to sign them with four tildes (~~~~) to paste in your user name and the date/time of the comment. If you have any questions, please feel free to post them in our Ten Forward community page. Thanks, and once again, welcome to Memory Alpha! -- Archduk3 (Talk) 08:35, 1 August 2010 :The above named user is the most currently available administrator to contribute to Memory Alpha; their signature was automatically added by User:Wikia. If you have any immediate questions or concerns, you may contact that user through their talk page. Talk pages Please review MA:TALK, specifically ; new comments go to the bottom of the relevant section. If you are responding to an earlier post, you should indicate that in your response. This prevents posts on the talk pages from getting too mixed up with each other.--31dot 23:34, September 29, 2011 (UTC) :I suppose that's fair enough, although it seems like a silly policy. Why should anyone have to repeat the point to which he/she is responding when there could be 50 unrelated points in-between? This truly mixes up the posts and makes the thread utterly impossible to follow. :It seems far better to me to put the response immediately after the item being responded to, even if there have been subsequent entries. (And just FYI: I was not responding to Morder's point, but to the original question. If I had been responding to Morder, I would have double-indented my response, instead of putting it at the same level.) -- Beerslayer 02:53, September 30, 2011 (UTC) Organizing posts purely by date is much easier and less confusing than organizing them by what is being responded to. It's harder to follow how a discussion flows and develops if one has to keep scrolling back and forth. You don't have to repeat the entire point; I usually just note either who I'm responding to or the date of their post(if they have multiple posts). Sorry I got confused about what you were addressing.--31dot 09:22, September 30, 2011 (UTC) :First of all, let me say how glad I am that this discussion has remained civil. Some people take editing a wiki WAY too seriously and get very upset over the slightest thing that they disapprove of (even when they're wrong). I've had people on Wikipedia physically threaten me after I've fixed their spelling or grammatical mistakes. That said, I don't mean to be disagreeable, but I disagree wholeheartedly with what you've said here. :Forcing posts that refer to earlier material to be placed at the end solely due to posting date will force the reader, assuming he doesn't lose interest completely and close the page, to scroll back and forth. It will completely destroy the flow of a discussion, and lead to posts scattered throughout the thread referring to the same thing. Putting a post next to the material it is referring to (regardless of posting date) is the proper way to preserve that flow. -- Beerslayer 03:39, October 1, 2011 (UTC) ::Interestingly, the method we use here has worked quite successfully for several years now, without much complaint. We are a bit particular about the way we deal with talk pages, but it's a system that works very well for us. As such, we'd ask you to respect it and adhere to it. Thanks. -- sulfur 03:52, October 1, 2011 (UTC)